{"id":"workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004","name":"Workers' Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004","slug":"workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"wa","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":113061,"registerId":"wa-workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Workers' Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004","content":"![Crest]()Western Australia\n\nWorkers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004\n\nWestern Australia\n\nWorkers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004\n\nContents\n\nPart 1 — Preliminary\n\n1. Short title 2\n\n2. Commencement 2\n\n3. Purpose 2\n\nPart 2 — Provisions relating to section 32 of the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Amendment Act 1999*\n\n4. Terms used in this Part 3\n\n5. Provisions applying to awarding of damages 3\n\n6. Existing determinations unaffected 4\n\n7. Jurisdiction removed and workers’ costs indemnified 5\n\nPart 3 — Amendments to other Acts\n\n8. The Act amended 7\n\n9. Section 93E amended 7\n\n10. Sections 93EA, 93EB, and 93EC inserted 7\n\n93EA. Referring questions with fresh evidence in particular cases 7\n\n93EB. Referring questions in certain other cases 10\n\n93EC. Extended time for commencing proceedings 12\n\n11. Section 154AC inserted 13\n\n154AC. Regulations for subsidy from Supplementation Fund 13\n\n12. *Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund Act 1980* amended 14\n\nNotes\n\nCompilation table 15\n\nDefined terms\n\n  \n\nWestern Australia\n\nWorkers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004\n\nAn Act to —\n\n• make provision for certain applications and proceedings relating to the awarding of damages to workers; and\n\n• amend the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981* and the *Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund Act 1980*.\n\n## Part 1 — Preliminary\n\n##### 1. Short title\n\nThis Act may be cited as the *Workers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004*.\n\n##### 2. Commencement\n\n(1) Except as stated in subsection (2), this Act comes into operation on the day on which it receives the Royal Assent.\n\n(2) Section 5(1) and (2) are deemed to have come into operation on 5 October 1999.\n\n##### 3. Purpose\n\nThe purposes of this Act are —\n\n(a) to ensure that so far as is equitable the intention of Parliament in enacting section 32 of the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Amendment Act 1999*, as stated by the Minister for Labour Relations in the Legislative Assembly on 21 October 1999 (*Parliamentary Debates* (Hansard) at 2456), is given effect; and\n\n(b) to ensure that workers are not disadvantaged by the effect of certain decisions of the Supreme Court in relation to the operation of section 93D of the *Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981*.\n\n[Section 3 amended: No. 42 of 2004 s. 173(2).]\n\n## Part 2 — Provisions relating to section 32 of the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Amendment Act 1999*\n\n##### 4. Terms used in this Part\n\n(1) In this Part, unless the contrary intention appears —\n\n  1999 Act means the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Amendment Act 1999*;\n\n  amended provisions means sections 93A to 93G of the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981* as amended from time to time;\n\n  assent day has the same meaning as in section 32(6) of the 1999 Act;\n\n  former provisions has the same meaning as in section 32(6) of the 1999 Act.\n\n(2) Unless the contrary intention appears, words and expressions used in this Part have the same meaning as they have in the *Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981*.\n\n[Section 4 amended: No. 42 of 2004 s. 173(2).]\n\n##### 5. Provisions applying to awarding of damages\n\n(1) This section —\n\n(a) is to be read in conjunction with section 32 of the 1999 Act as if this section were incorporated with and formed part of that section; and\n\n(b) applies in addition to section 32(7) of the 1999 Act.\n\n(2) Despite section 37 of the *Interpretation Act 1984* and any other law, written or unwritten but except as otherwise stated in subsection (3) or in the amended provisions —\n\n(a) the amended provisions apply to, and affect the awarding of damages in, a proceeding; and\n\n(b) the former provisions do not apply to, or affect the awarding of damages in, a proceeding,\n\nunless it is a proceeding —\n\n(c) commenced before the assent day; or\n\n(d) for the commencement of which a court gave leave under the former provisions before the assent day.\n\n(3) Despite subsection (2), section 37 of the *Interpretation Act 1984* and any other law, written or unwritten, but except as otherwise stated in section 6(4) —\n\n(a) the amended provisions do not apply to, or affect the awarding of damages in, a proceeding; and\n\n(b) the former provisions apply to, and affect the awarding of damages in, a proceeding,\n\nthat is a proceeding —\n\n(c) commenced on or before the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent with the leave of a court under the former provisions; or\n\n(d) for the commencement of which a court gave leave under the former provisions on or before the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent or on District Court file number WC 93D 1194/1998.\n\n##### 6. Existing determinations unaffected\n\n(1) In this section —\n\n  determination includes a decision, ruling, order, award, judgment, settlement or agreement but does not include a determination in respect of a proceeding referred to in section 5(2)(c) or (d).\n\n(2) Where a determination was given, made or registered after the assent day on the basis that the amended provisions, and not the former provisions, applied, the fact that the determination was given, made, or registered on that basis is not a reason for —\n\n(a) the determination to be rescinded, set aside, altered or amended;\n\n(b) the determination to be subject to appeal, review or challenge in any way; or\n\n(c) the worker to be entitled to any further payment under the provisions of the *Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981* or any other law, written or unwritten.\n\n(3) No determination given, made, or registered after the assent day is invalid or less effective by reason that it was given, made or registered on the basis that the amended provisions, and not the former provisions, applied.\n\n(4) Section 5(3) does not apply if the cause of action to which a proceeding relates is the subject of an award of damages, settlement or agreement to which subsections (2) and (3) apply.\n\n[Section 6 amended: No. 42 of 2004 s. 173(2).]\n\n##### 7. Jurisdiction removed and workers’ costs indemnified\n\n(1) In this section —\n\n  commencement day means the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent;\n\n  former provisions matter means —\n\n(a) an application for leave to commence proceedings under the former provisions;\n\n(b) an application for leave to appeal from a refusal to grant leave to commence proceedings under the former provisions;\n\n(c) an appeal from a refusal to grant leave to commence proceedings under the former provisions; or\n\n(d) a proceeding to which section 5(3) would have applied but for the operation of section 6(4),\n\nbut does not include an application, appeal or proceeding on or relating to District Court file number WC 93D 1194/1998.\n\n(2) On and after the commencement day no court may hear or determine a former provisions matter.\n\n(3) Any former provisions matter that has been commenced but not determined before the commencement day is a nullity, and is taken to have been dismissed by operation of this subsection with no order for costs.\n\n(4) A worker who, during the period commencing on 4 December 2003 and ending on the day on which this Act receives the Royal Assent, has incurred legal costs in commencing or continuing a former provisions matter that is taken to have been dismissed by operation of subsection (3), is entitled to be paid reasonable costs so incurred.\n\n(5) The chief executive officer may determine what are reasonable costs for the purposes of subsection (4).\n\n(6) If the worker disputes the determination of the chief executive officer, the chief executive officer is to refer the matter to a registrar of the District Court or a taxing officer of the Supreme Court who may determine what are reasonable costs as if the determination were a taxation of costs.\n\n(7) Costs that a person is entitled to be paid under this section are payable from the General Fund.\n\n[Section 7 amended: No. 42 of 2004 s. 173(3) and (4).]\n\n## Part 3 — Amendments to other Acts\n\n##### 8. The Act amended\n\nThe amendments in this Part, other than the amendment in section 12, are to the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981*.\n\n##### 9. Section 93E amended\n\n(1) Section 93E(5) is amended by inserting after “subsections (6)” —\n\n“ , (6a), ”.\n\n(2) After section 93E(6) the following subsection is inserted —\n\n“\n\n(6a) Despite subsection (5) and even though subsection (6) does not apply, if the Director gives the worker notice under section 93EA(5)(b)(i) or 93EB(5)(b)(i) that this subsection applies an election can be made under subsection (3)(b) within 14 days after the Director subsequently gives the worker notice in writing that an agreement or determination of the question has been recorded.\n\n”.\n\n##### 10. Sections 93EA, 93EB, and 93EC inserted\n\nAfter section 93E the following sections are inserted —\n\n“\n\n93EA. Referring questions with fresh evidence in particular cases\n\n(1) Unless it does not apply because of subsection (2), subsection (3) applies if —\n\n(a) on or before 30 September 2001, a worker —\n\n(i) sought to refer a question to the Director under section 93D(5); and\n\n(ii) in order to satisfy section 93D(6), produced to the Director anything that, even though it may not have constituted evidence of the kind required by that subsection, was accepted by the Director as evidence of that kind;\n\nand\n\n(b) the Director treated the question as having been referred under section 93D(5), after which, for a reason based on a failure to satisfy the requirements of section 93D(6) for a referral under section 93D(5) —\n\n(i) a review officer did not deal with the substance of the question; or\n\n(ii) a court set aside or quashed a decision of a review officer that dealt with the substance of the question.\n\n(2) If the question is whether the worker’s degree of disability is not less than 16%, subsection (3) does not apply unless the production of what was produced as referred to in subsection (1)(a)(ii) and the purported referral of the question both occurred —\n\n(a) not less than 21 days before the termination day; or\n\n(b) before a day fixed under section 93E(7) by the Director.\n\n(3) If this subsection applies, the worker may, within the time limited by subsection (4)(b) and otherwise in accordance with subsection (4), refer to the Director under section 93D(5) the same question as is mentioned in subsection (1)(a)(i), relating to the same disability and only that disability.\n\n(4) A question can only be referred under subsection (3) if —\n\n(a) the referral is made in writing in a form specified in the regulations stating that the worker is also acting under subsection (3);\n\n(b) the referral is made —\n\n(i) within the period of 3 months commencing after the day on which section 10 of the *Workers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004* comes into operation (called the commencement day in subparagraph (ii)); or\n\n(ii) if subsection (1)(b)(ii) applies and the decision is set aside or quashed after the commencement day, within the period of 3 months commencing after the day on which the decision is set aside or quashed;\n\nand\n\n(c) when referring the question to the Director, the worker produces to the Director evidence relating to the disability that complies with section 93D(6), or satisfies the Director that complying evidence has already been produced to the Director.\n\n(5) If a worker seeks to make a referral under section 93D(5) stating that it is also made under subsection (3) of this section, the Director is required, as soon as practicable, to notify the worker and the employer, in accordance with the regulations —\n\n(a) whether or not the Director is of the opinion that evidence complying with section 93D(6) has been produced and in all other respects the referral is properly made; and\n\n(b) if the Director —\n\n(i) is of that opinion, that the referral is accepted and section 93E(6a), if relevant, and section 93EC apply;\n\n(ii) is not of that opinion, that the referral sought to be made by the worker is not accepted.\n\n93EB. Referring questions in certain other cases\n\n(1) Unless it does not apply because of subsection (2), subsection (3) applies if —\n\n(a) before the coming into operation of section 10 of the *Workers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004*, a worker sought to refer a question to the Director under section 93D(5);\n\n(b) on or after 4 December 2003, on the basis that Part IV Division 2 as in force before it was amended by section 32 of the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Amendment Act 1999* applied to proceedings for the awarding of the damages concerned—\n\n(i) a review officer did not deal with the substance of the question; or\n\n(ii) a court set aside or quashed a decision of a review officer that dealt with the substance of the question;\n\nand\n\n(c) after the coming into operation of section 10 of the *Workers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004*, section 93D(5) applies and the worker wishes to refer the question to the Director under that section.\n\n(2) If the question is whether the worker’s degree of disability is not less than 16%, subsection (3) does not apply unless the purported referral of the question occurred —\n\n(a) not less than 21 days before the termination day; or\n\n(b) before a day fixed under section 93E(7) by the Director.\n\n(3) If this subsection applies, the worker may, within the time limited by subsection (4)(b) and otherwise in accordance with subsection (4), refer to the Director under section 93D(5) the same question as is mentioned in subsection (1)(a), relating to the same disability and only that disability.\n\n(4) A question can only be referred under subsection (3) if —\n\n(a) the referral is made in writing in a form specified in the regulations stating that the worker is also acting under subsection (3);\n\n(b) the referral is made —\n\n(i) within the period of 3 months commencing after the day on which section 10 of the *Workers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004* comes into operation (called the commencement day in subparagraph (ii)); or\n\n(ii) if subsection (1)(b)(ii) applies and the decision is set aside or quashed after the commencement day, within the period of 3 months commencing after the day on which the decision is set aside or quashed;\n\nand\n\n(c) when referring the question to the Director, the worker produces to the Director evidence relating to the disability that complies with section 93D(6), or satisfies the Director that complying evidence has already been produced to the Director.\n\n(5) If a worker seeks to make a referral under section 93D(5) stating that it is also made under subsection (3) of this section, the Director is required, as soon as practicable, to notify the worker and the employer, in accordance with the regulations —\n\n(a) whether or not the Director is of the opinion that evidence complying with section 93D(6) has been produced and in all other respects the referral is properly made; and\n\n(b) if the Director —\n\n(i) is of that opinion, that the referral is accepted and section 93E(6a), if relevant, and section 93EC apply;\n\n(ii) is not of that opinion, that the referral sought to be made by the worker is not accepted.\n\n93EC. Extended time for commencing proceedings\n\nIf —\n\n(a) under section 93EA(5)(b)(i) or 93EB(5)(b)(i), the Director notifies a worker that the referral of a question relating to a disability is accepted and that this section applies; and\n\n(b) the time limited by any written law for the commencement of an action seeking damages in respect of the disability —\n\n(i) has elapsed before the day on which the Director notifies the worker (the notification day); or\n\n(ii) is due to elapse on the notification day or before the expiry of a period of 2 years after the notification day,\n\nan action seeking damages in respect of the disability may, despite that written law, be commenced at any time before the expiry of a period of 2 years after the notification day.\n\n”.\n\n##### 11. Section 154AC inserted\n\nBefore the heading to Part IX the following section is inserted —\n\n“\n\n154AC. Regulations for subsidy from Supplementation Fund\n\n(1) The regulations may authorise the Commission to approve an application by an employer for reimbursement of the cost of paying an award of damages to which Part IV Division 2 applies in a case in which a question as to the worker’s degree of disability was referred under section 93EA(3) to the extent, if any, to which the cost exceeds the amount ascertained in accordance with regulations made for the purposes of this section.\n\n(2) The amount of any reimbursement approved under the regulations is to be paid by the Commission to the employer and charged against the Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund established under section 5(1) of the *Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund Act 1980*.\n\n”.\n\n##### 12. *Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund Act 1980* amended\n\n(1) The amendment in this section is to the *Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund Act 1980*.\n\n(2) Section 10(fa) is amended by inserting before the semicolon at the end of the paragraph —\n\n“\n\nor section 154AC of the *Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981*\n\n”.\n\nNotes\n\n1 This is a compilation of the *Workers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004*. The following table contains information about that Act.\n\nCompilation table\n\n| **Short title** | **Number and year** | **Assent** | **Commencement** |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| *Workers’ Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004* | 35 of 2004 | 25 Oct 2004 | s. 5(1) and (2): 5 Oct 1999 (see s. 2(2));   Act, other than s. 5(1) and (2): 25 Oct 2004 (see s. 2(1)) |\n| *Workers’ Compensation Reform Act 2004* s. 173 | 42 of 2004 | 9 Nov 2004 | 4 Jan 2005 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 31 Dec 2004 p. 7131) |\n\n\nDefined terms\n\n*[This is a list of terms defined and the provisions where they are defined. The list is not part of the law.]*\n\n**Defined term Provision(s)**\n\n1999 Act 4(1)\n\namended provisions 4(1)\n\nassent day 4(1)\n\ncommencement day 7(1)\n\ndetermination 6(1)\n\nformer provisions 4(1)\n\nformer provisions matter 7(1)\n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[],"contradictions":[]},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":7,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"This Act broadened and clarified the practical reach of the 1999 amendments by (a) applying the post‑1999 amended provisions in most cases (including by retrospective deeming), (b) extinguishing certain pending pre‑1999 leave applications and appeals (removing court jurisdiction over those matters) while replacing that route with state‑administered cost indemnities for eligible workers (section 7), and (c) creating narrow re‑referral and timing rights (sections 93EA–93EC) and an employer reimbursement pathway charged to the Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund (section 154AC). Those additions go beyond a simple declaratory clarification of Parliament's 1999 intention: they alter procedural rights, institute new fiscal liabilities (General Fund and Supplementation Fund exposures), and set specific transitional mechanisms that change how pre‑existing disputes are resolved."},"complexity_factors":["Retrospective/deemed commencement effects (section 5(1)–(3) and s.2(2) deeming parts operative from 5 Oct 1999)","Multiple cross‑references to at least three other Acts: Workers’ Compensation and Injury Management Act 1981 (and its Parts/sections 93D–93E), Interpretation Act 1984, Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund Act 1980","Transitional and conditional logic with nested exceptions (e.g. section 5(2) vs 5(3), section 6(4) carve‑out, and detailed exclusions such as District Court file WC 93D 1194/1998 in section 7)","Insertion of three new detailed procedural sections (93EA, 93EB, 93EC) each containing multi‑step eligibility tests, strict evidence and timing requirements, and notification duties","Multiple time limits and windows (3‑month re‑referral window, 21‑day cut‑offs, 2‑year extension for commencing actions)","New fiscal/administrative mechanisms: indemnity of workers' costs (chief executive and taxing officer roles) and Commission‑administered reimbursements charged to the Supplementation Fund (section 154AC)","Specific procedural enforcement points: Director's acceptance/rejection notifications and the consequences that flow from acceptance (affecting election under section 93E)","Presence of a single‑case carve‑out and specified file‑number exception increases interpretive friction for practitioners","Potential need for subordinate instruments (regulations) to determine form, amounts and process for reimbursements and notifications"],"plain_english_summary":"This Act confirms that the post‑1999 common‑law damages scheme applies in most cases, extinguishes certain pending pre‑1999 leave applications (treating them as dismissed), and provides limited reimbursement of legal costs to affected workers. \n\nIt also creates narrow transitional rules letting some workers re‑refer previously failed degree‑of‑disability questions (triggering a two‑year window to sue), and allows regulations to enable partial employer reimbursement from the Employers’ Indemnity Supplementation Fund. It mainly affects injured workers, employers, the Director and the Commission."},"summary":{"complexity_score":1,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Scope cannot be assessed as no legislative content was available for analysis. The submission contained only a website error message indicating the page has been removed or relocated during a system upgrade."},"complexity_factors":["No legislative text was retrievable — only a webpage error message was provided","Cannot assess complexity without access to the actual provisions","Title alone suggests the Act may involve procedural and substantive legal rules, which are typically moderately to highly complex, but this cannot be confirmed"],"plain_english_summary":"## ⚠️ Content Unavailable\n\nThe actual text of the **Workers' Compensation (Common Law Proceedings) Act 2004** (Western Australia) could not be retrieved. The legislation page has been taken down or moved as part of a website upgrade by the Western Australian Parliamentary Counsel's Office.\n\n**What we do know from the title alone:**\n- This is a **Western Australian law** dealing with workers' compensation\n- It specifically relates to **'common law proceedings'** — meaning lawsuits where an injured worker sues their employer directly in court (as opposed to making a standard workers' comp insurance claim)\n- It was enacted in **2004**\n- These types of laws typically govern things like: who can sue, under what circumstances, time limits for bringing claims, and what damages can be awarded\n\n**To access the actual legislation**, visit the [Western Australian legislation website](https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au) and search for the Act by name."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":7,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation remains tightly focused on its original purpose: resolving transitional issues arising from the 1999 workers' compensation amendments and addressing specific Supreme Court decisions that disadvantaged workers. While it amends other Acts and creates new procedural pathways, these are all directly connected to the core purpose of clarifying which statutory regime applies to pending and future proceedings. There is no significant scope creep beyond remedying the specific legal uncertainties identified in section 3."},"complexity_factors":["Heavy reliance on cross-references to other Acts (Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 1981, Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Amendment Act 1999, Employers' Indemnity Supplementation Fund Act 1980, Interpretation Act 1984)","Multiple nested exceptions and conditional logic (e.g., section 5 has exceptions to exceptions regarding which provisions apply)","Retroactive and retrospective operation—deems certain sections to have commenced on 5 October 1999 despite Royal Assent on 25 October 2004","Specific reference to individual court file number (WC 93D 1194/1998) as an exception, indicating highly targeted legislative response to specific litigation","Complex temporal triggers ('assent day', 'commencement day', 'termination day', specific dates like 4 December 2003, 30 September 2001, 21 days before termination day)","8 defined terms in Part 2 alone, with meanings imported from other legislation","Parallel structures in sections 93EA and 93EB with subtle differences in triggering conditions (fresh evidence vs. jurisdictional confusion)","Interaction between administrative processes (Director determinations) and judicial processes (court leave, appeals) with different consequences depending on timing"],"plain_english_summary":"This Western Australian law fixes a legal mess created by confusion over workers' compensation rules that changed in 1999. Here's what it does:\n\n**The Problem:**\nIn 1999, WA changed how injured workers could sue for damages (common law claims). The new rules required workers to prove they had at least 15% permanent impairment to sue. But there was confusion about which rules applied to cases already in the system—did the old rules or new rules apply? Some court decisions made things worse for workers.\n\n**What This Law Does:**\n\n**1. Clarifies Which Rules Apply When**\n- Generally, the new 1999 rules apply to all proceedings unless they were started before a specific date (5 October 1999) or had court approval before that date\n- But there's an exception: if a worker got court leave to start proceedings under the old rules before this Act became law, the old rules still apply to them\n- Protects decisions already made under the new rules—nobody can go back and challenge them just because of this clarification\n\n**2. Kills Off Pending 'Old Rules' Cases**\n- Stops all courts from hearing any applications or appeals about starting cases under the old rules (with one specific exception for a particular court file)\n- Any such cases already started but not finished are declared invalid (\"nullity\")\n- **However**, workers who paid legal costs between December 2003 and when this law passed can get those costs reimbursed from the government's General Fund\n\n**3. Gives Some Workers a 'Second Chance'**\nCreates two special pathways for workers who tried to refer questions about their disability level to the Director but were knocked back for technical reasons:\n\n- **Section 93EA**: For workers who tried to refer questions before October 2001 and had evidence accepted by the Director (even if technically not perfect), but then lost because a court or review officer said the evidence didn't strictly comply with requirements\n- **Section 93EB**: For workers who tried to refer questions before this law started, but were rejected because courts thought the old rules applied (when they actually didn't)\n\nBoth pathways let these workers re-refer their questions within 3 months, provided they now produce proper evidence.\n\n**4. Extends Time Limits for Suing**\nIf a worker successfully re-refers a question under the new sections 93EA or 93EB, they get 2 years from when the Director accepts the referral to start their court action—even if the normal time limit had already expired or was about to expire.\n\n**5. Creates a Subsidy for Employers**\nAllows regulations to be made so employers can get reimbursed from a special government fund (the Employers' Indemnity Supplementation Fund) for some damages awards in these special cases.\n\n**Who It Affects:**\n- Injured workers in WA who were caught in the 'transition period' between the old and new compensation systems\n- Employers facing damages claims from these workers\n- The Director of Workers' Compensation and review officers\n- Courts handling these matters\n\n**Why It Matters:**\nThis is essentially a 'cleanup' law. It prevents years of litigation about which set of rules applies, protects workers who were disadvantaged by court decisions interpreting the 1999 changes, and provides a limited amnesty for workers who got tripped up by technical evidence requirements when trying to prove their disability level."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"Unauthenticated. Configure AI_GATEWAY_API_KEY or use a provider module. Learn more: https://ai-sdk.dev/unauthenticated-ai-gateway","source":"analysis-cron"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004","history":"/api/acts/workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004/history","analysis":"/api/acts/workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/workers-compensation-common-law-proceedings-act-2004/documents"}}